Theological Studies 44 (1983) LEISE TRETEN: AN IRENIC ECUMENICAL HERMENEUTIC1 ROBERT KRESS The Catholic University of America HAT THE ECUMENICAL movement is no longer flush with the enthu­ Tsiasm of the mid-sixties can hardly be contested. The worst fears and best hopes of all sides have been rendered otiose, notwithstanding some continuing interchurch social action and the doggedly enduring bilateral discussions among various churches. Not all, however, is decay and decline. The Lima report of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches in early 1982 spoke of "a kairos of the ecumenical movement when sadly divided churches have been enabled to arrive at substantial theological agree­ ments ... that theologians of such widely different traditions should be able to speak so harmoniously about baptism, Eucharist and ministry is unprecedented in the modern ecumenical movement."2 Another ray of light came from the Final Report of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, which has found sufficient "convergence ... to call for the establishing of a new relationship between our Churches as a next stage in the journey towards Christian unity."3 The "Luther Year" of 1983 is regarded with fear and hope: with fear by those who wonder whether it will occasion a revival of the polemical "most Lutheran Luther," with hope by those who take the "Luther jubilee as an ecumenical challenge and duty."4 The greatest disappointment of Pope John Paul's otherwise generally successful trip to Germany was in regard to the Augsburg Confession. Nevertheless, according to Otto Hermann Pesch, on the occasion of his Paris visit Pope John Paul is to have said: "I follow all the discussions about the Augsburg Confession with great intensity. Indeed, I follow it in a manner which I don't understand myself. Something in me does this 1 "Leise treten" comes from a letter of Martin Luther about the Augsburg Confession. It means "to tread lightly." Its ecumenical significance will become clear during the course of this article. 2 Preface to the texts. See also Avery Dulles, "Toward a Christian Consensus: The Lima Meeting," America 146 (1982) 126-29. 3 Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, The Final Report (Washington: U.S. Catholic Conference, 1982) 99. 4 Peter Manns, "Das Lutherjubiläum 1983 als ökumenische Aufgabe," Ökumenische Rundschau 38 (1981) 290-313. 407 408 THEOLOGICAL STUDIES following, in the manner of Christ's statement to Peter: another will lead you' [Jn 21:18]... ."5 The papal trip to England also enjoyed ambivalent success. The worst fears of antipapal demonstrations were not borne out. There were touch­ ing scenes of ecumenical mutuality. Nevertheless, many ecumenists were disappointed, if not discouraged. Especially after the publication of the above-mentioned Final Report, more was awaited than agreement to establish yet another international study commission. Study commis­ sions may well be helpful, even necessary, to achieve adequate mutual understanding; but they can also serve as excuses for postponement of practical programs, deferral of decisions. This general decline in ecumenical activity is even more disappointing in that the bilateral consultations have steadily discerned a hitherto unsuspected doctrinal convergence among the various churches. And the Final Report of ARCIC was even able to admit forthrightly: "Neverthe­ less, although our unity has been impaired through separation, it has not been destroyed."6 Of special importance for this impaired but not de­ stroyed unity is Karl Rahner's contention: "In the general, common understanding of the faith (Glaubensbewusstsein), as it in fact exists among contemporary Christians in the various churches, essential differ­ ences can hardly be found The de facto Glaubensbewusstsein among normal Christians in today's churches is the same."7 Rahner goes on to ask why official institutional-ecclesial (kirchenamtlichen) and scholarly differences and disputes should continue to thwart that public ecclesial unity which would be but the recognition and expression of the unity in faith which does in fact exist among the members of the various churches. In support of this position, he invokes the normativity of the consensus 5 Cited by Gerd Geier, "Der Reformator auf der Waage," Rheinischer Merkur/Christ und Welt 28 (July 10, 1981) 21. 6 Final Report 5. 7 Karl Rahner, Schriften zur Theologie 12 (Einsiedeln: Benziger, 1975) 560, 561. Unex­ pected support may be mined from a perhaps unexpected source. "'We talked/ recorded Boswell of a conversation with Dr. Johnson, 'of the Roman Catholick religion, and how little difference there was in essential matters between ours and it.'... 'True Sir/ com­ mented the doctor, 'all denominations of Christians have really little difference in point of doctrine, though they may differ widely in external forms. There is a prodigious difference between the external form of one of your Presbyterian churches in Scotland and a church in Italy; yet the doctrine taught is essentially the same/" In another conversation Dr. Johnson goes on: " 'For my part Sir, I think all Christians whether Papists or Protestants, agree in the essential articles, and that their differences are trivial, and rather political than religious'" (James Boswell, Life of Samuel Johnson [Chicago: Britannica, 1952] 188, 359). One need not, of course, subscribe to the evaluation of "trivial." Nevertheless, outside evaluations from those without vested interest can be helpful and sobering, especially to those whose livelihood can be bound up with the perceived differences—theologians, church officials. LEISE TRETEN 409 fidelium for doctrinal orthodoxy. He concludes his reflections by noting that, if his contention is correct, "then the ecumenical question today is no longer a question directed to theologians, but a question directed to the officeholders in the churches."8 Against this background I make a twofold proposal to help these officeholders advance public and visible church unity. In the spirit of efforts at Augsburg and Trent to promote church unity, I shall propose the much-defamed and oft-misinterpreted "Leise treten" of Martin Lu­ ther as an irenic, ecumenical hermeneutical principle. I shall then suggest a threefold articulation of the Christian tradition into creed, theology, and spirituality as the structural framework within which the "Leise treten* can be put into practice in ecumenical discussions and decisions. On this basis, with the help of other principles to be noted later on, it might be possible for the now separated churches to find their way to the "One Church," whose notae would be unity in diversity, diversity in unity. "LEISE TRETEN" AS HERMENEUTICAL PRINCIPLE Prolegomena Before we begin our considerations proper, it is important to recall W. A. Visser 't Hooft's contention that, although the unity of the Church has always been a burning problem, "the ecumenical problem [as such] is a relatively modern problem ... that is, the problem of the reunion of the separated churches had not been posed generally and clearly in centuries other than ours.*9 He also notes that previously the emphasis had been on "unity among Christians" and not on the "unity of the churches." This distinction is important for our later discussions, as is Paul Ricoeur's description of "hermeneutics [as] the theory of the rules that preside over an exegesis—that is, over the interpretation of a particular text, or of a group of signs that may be viewed as a text."10 Originally identified with biblical exegesis, hermeneutics now describes "a broad range of investigations into the basic human phenomenon of human understanding through language ... methodological reflection in the interpretation of historical texts and ontological analysis of historical existence as a linguistic process."11 This expanded understanding of hermeneutics is necessary if "Leise treten" is to be able to serve as a principle or rule to interpret that "text" which is really a whole tradition. As Edward Schillebeeckx notes, "On the basis of our essential being as 8 Schriften 12, 567. 9 W. A. Visser 't Hooft, "Le protestantisme et le problème oecuménique," Foi et vie 74/ 75 (September/October 1935) 613-27. 10 Paul Ricoeur, Freud and Philosophy (New Haven: Yale University, 1970) 8. 11 Patrick Burns, "Hermeneutics (Contemporary)," NCE 16 (1967) 206. 410 THEOLOGICAL STUDIES men, understanding is a reinterpretative understanding of tradition—an understanding of tradition in the manner of reinterpretation."12 Augsburg and Its Confession The interpretation of the religious tradition stemming from Abraham and Jesus was the question at the time of the Reformation. Earlier the crises in the interpretation of this tradition had been milder. The tradi­ tion had been able to preserve itself in spite of various conflicts.13 However, the sixteenth century was to illustrate and prove the truth of Hans Georg Gadamer's keen observation that "the hermeneutical prob­ lem only emerges clearly when there is no powerful tradition present to absorb one's own attitude into itself and when one is aware of confronting an alien tradition to which he has never belonged or one he no longer unquestioningly accepts."14 Such was the case in regard to the religio- cultural tradition known as Christendom when in Augsburg in 1530 Emperor Charles V summoned a council "to hear with all possible discretion ... the diverse opinions that exist among us, to understand and to weigh them, and to bring them together in a single